See "Tangled Web" for FREE!

D

David W. Richardson

Chapelgrove Films
Who wants to see my unique suspense/drama feature 'Tangled Web' this weekend FOR FREE???!

I have put 'Tangled Web' on Vimeo, with a password required for access.

From now until this Sunday night (3/16/14), if you send me a PM here and tell me you want to see 'Tangled Web', then I will send you the link and the password. You can watch it as many times as you want -- for FREE -- until I change the password Sunday night.

Then, if you would be so kind, I'd appreciate it if you would come here and tell us what you thought of the movie. Honesty appreciated. 'Brutal' honesty isn't. You can spell out what you didn't like without being rude about it.

FREE MOVIE!

PM me now. :-)
 
"What's 'Tangled Web' about???"

A lonely woman trapped in an abusive marriage finds solace in her online lover -- a man she only knows through online video chatting. Unknown to her, she is also being secretly watched via her webcam. After the woman suffers a brutal beating at the hands of her husband, her lover proposes a bold plan -- a way she can kill her husband and claim self-defense. But the plan goes very, very wrong.

Watch the preview trailer at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsI-oCNXrcU
 
Hey Dave you should just put the password on this page rather than people pm you, I guarantee you'll get more views.
 
I was trying to avoid that, as I don't want lurkers going and watching the movie for free. I'd like to keep it to serious folks here who are members and participators. People who would take the time to give an honest review here and on IMDB. I figure if people won't take the time to PM me for the password, then I won't likely get a serious review from them either.
 
I'm sorry to sound harsh David, but that is very strange logic about not posting the password because you don't want "lurkers" to see your film??? What defines a lurker? What do you care? Maybe it's a film for lurkers, who knows? I have never heard of someone being discriminative towards an audience. If the password were posted, I would have checked it out, but I'm not jumping through hoops to view a no budget film on my sunday morn. That's to much hassle. sorry
 
maranfilms said:
I'm sorry to sound harsh David, but that is very strange logic about not posting the password because you don't want "lurkers" to see your film??? What defines a lurker? What do you care? Maybe it's a film for lurkers, who knows? I have never heard of someone being discriminative towards an audience. If the password were posted, I would have checked it out, but I'm not jumping through hoops to view a no budget film on my sunday morn. That's to much hassle. sorry
Click to expand...

The offer to watch 'Tangled Web' for free this weekend stemmed from another discussion thread here where people were helping me find ways to improve marketing the film. A number of the suggestions were things I couldn't use, but the people suggesting them didn't know that because they hadn't actually seen the movie. So I thought it would be good to make it available for a short time so these people could watch it and get a solid idea of ths storyline.

One of the things suggested that was useful was that the movie needs more people posting reviews of it online. So I put up this additional thread in hopes of getting people to watch the movie who would then give honest reviews of it, both here and on IMDB.

But this was not a wholesale attempt to get as many people to watch the movie for free as possible. It's specifically meant as a sort of 'focus group' -- getting folks to watch the movie with the intention of having them review it, for the purposes of improving the marketing of the movie.

As such, anyone who won't go to the trouble to PM me for the password isn't likely to take the time to write an honest, insightful review of the movie either.

There was a goal to putting the movie out for free here. Sorry, I should've explained all that in the beginning.
 
As such, anyone who won't go to the trouble to PM me for the password isn't likely to take the time to write an honest, insightful review of the movie either.
I don't agree with this, but that's ok.
 
SPOILERS AHEAD (note: if you think I reveal too much here David, I can simply cut/paste the thing and send it via pm)

Tangled Web is a movie that has a neat idea and a lot of 'suspense of belief' moments. It goes too long before anything happens, and when it does, I found it very... strange?

First of all, the idea of webcam-movie is really cool, but I don't think you used it's potential. You could fake sex scenes, nudity, perhaps even have a webcam on laptop to add a bit more locations/content. Watching the same location for 70 minutes is very tiring. It's like a theater play, and a very claustrophobic one.

But ok, enough with that - the movie itself.

Story. It starts way too slow and even after some 10 minutes into the movie we have no reason no watch it further (i.e. we don't care about anyone). I believe this is your major problem. It's strange to start a film with a story we will actually not going to see (all those 'stealth cameras' before our actual story). It's very misleading and kinda disappointing. All those hidden web cams weren't explained either. The guy (Taylor) does it just for fun? Or is he a pro-hack-spy-whatever type of a guy who does this for a living? I was expecting this story to be moving back and forth between all those stories because that's what you actually announced with your first scene/s. (I watched the movie without reading the logline or seeing the trailer)

Next, nothing happens for a long time. Most of your film is exposition of previous conflict - which should be established in the very beginning. I may be parroting a bit now, but I'd say you should start with a stronger 'hook'. Starting with cyber sex or a fail attempt of it, beating, something to get an idea what the movie is about. You do have a bit of a tension in beginning (which is good!), but it falls apart when from scene to scene we're waiting for something to happen... which is not good. I think your true story begins too late into the film (some 40 minutes) while it should hit us much earlier.

Your new logline reveals too much plot...

"A lonely woman trapped in an abusive marriage finds solace in her online lover -- a man she only knows through online video chatting. Unknown to her, she is also being secretly watched via her webcam. After the woman suffers a brutal beating at the hands of her husband, her lover proposes a bold plan -- a way she can kill her husband and claim self-defense. But the plan goes very, very wrong."

Too much info I'd say, and you reveal too much. Why not just go for something like:

"Encouraged by her online lover, a lonely woman trapped in an abusive marriage develops a desperate plan that will put an end to her violent husband. The plan goes wrong, unveiling the true nightmare of her life."

The whole 'secretly watched via webcam' doesn't really have any impact on the story. We know it's Taylor all the time (or the husband). When you have such a small cast, there's really not much room for guessing, so I would omit that 'mystery viewer' if possible.

The whole knife thing wasn't good for me, but that's just my taste - no arguments behind it. The resolution of the story with all the twists felt a bit awkward. How long they planned that conspiracy? Why would they go that far, I mean, they all look kinda like normal people (and in the end they sound very psychotic. They kill a woman and just go with it. Not even Taylor feels anything for her, which just might've been interesting...)
In the end, your story has a deus ex machina resolution - IT guy. He literally comes in like a super hero, and since the actor acts like a comedy-character, all the mystery and darker tone you were developing throughout the movie just turns out like that - a comedy. But, I'd say this is mostly because of the actor.

Acting. The main char (the girl) was really good, so was Taylor. But your major red flag in this movie (aside from story structure) is husband, the cop. You said you won't appreciate 'brutal honesty' so I won't emphasize how much I disliked his acting, but man - this guy ruined your movie. Seriously. His character was very shallow and unmotivated to begin with (he's angry because she read fairy tales to kids? what's his deal anyway?), but his acting is *insert brutal honesty line*.

It's also strange when he finds her in her underwear and yells at her for something totally unrelated. At that moment, why would he care she was on computer all day, or anything else? He could accuse her for doing web-cam porn or having an affair, anything that would make sense.

From technical standpoint, as I mentioned, this seems more like a theater play than a movie. I would say it definitely lasts too long (70 minutes is too much for this story IMO), sound had this higher pitch, no bass, and it sounded like it really was from a webcam (was that your goal?), scenes were lit ok but then again, it's webcam so you can do anything here.

Music felt a bit strange on some parts, the same as L cut in the beginning and fade ins/outs. If this is a webcam story, it should be a webcam story. This means we shouldn't feel like anything has been edited at all, you know? From what I can tell, this movie was just a bunch of clips two cops were watching, checking their hard-solid proof. I mean you could have the music if the music was played by the girl or Taylor. L cut doesn't work in this format.

Now, it may seem I'm being all negative here, but that's my impression of Tangled Web. I wouldn't pay to see this movie. Aside from webcam idea and main actress (which I really liked) I didn't like much else. If I was your producer/marketing/PR specialist, I would say

- re-edit it into a shorter film
- fix visuals. We're basically watching a computer screen... so you could have music player - hence - the music - and interface could look better. You know how MSN had avatar/status and all that? I don't know, it just seems it might work here as well.
- add some (perhaps two, three max) completely BLACK short scenes which you could use for some sex/cyber sex scenes, and additional exposition (which you will need if you're to re-edit a film).

I can see you're trying to market and sell the film. My suggestion is to move on, and use Tangled Web as learning platform. I don't believe you can monetize this film. You have some good ideas, and if you managed to pull this in 3 days, I think you can do a lot more. Untangle yourself from this and start a fresh, new project. Use the same concept if you want, keep developing it, make something new. If it's monetization you're after, maybe you should try shorter form before you take something like this. This concept might make a good web series (tho I don't know how to monetize web series).

Keep up!
 
Mile, I appreciate you watching the movie and giving such a detailed critique. You certainly make some valid points.

What I do want to say is that I have no intention of putting sex and nudity into the movie. I realize there are plenty of fans for that sort of thing, and they probably expected it just on the basis of the 'pretty woman being watched secretly via her webcam' thing. But I'm not putting sex and nudity into any movie I make. If that costs me that particular audience segment, so be it. It's a personal decision. I don't condemn anyone who feels differently.

Thank you again for watching the movie and providing such a detailed review. It truly is appreciated.
 
David W. Richardson said:
I was trying to avoid that, as I don't want lurkers going and watching the movie for free. I'd like to keep it to serious folks here who are members and participators. People who would take the time to give an honest review here and on IMDB. I figure if people won't take the time to PM me for the password, then I won't likely get a serious review from them either.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen the movie, but since you're asking for constructive criticism...

It's better to have many more people see your film for free, then an eventual select few paying for it. Even if you don't get all your money back, you can establish a name/reputation for future endeavors. If thousands of people get to watch a free movie now, they will remember that and be more likely to pay in the future.

Word-of-mouth is more likely if more people have access. Most successful projects involve interacting, utilizing social media. Causing a sense of alienation at the onset will not bode well...

Moreover, the internet is very unforgiving. If it becomes apparent you want people to watch just to get your money back, you may encounter some bad press. There are many past examples of this.
 
GHKAM said:
I haven't seen the movie, but since you're asking for constructive criticism...

It's better to have many more people see your film for free, then an eventual select few paying for it. Even if you don't get all your money back, you can establish a name/reputation for future endeavors. If thousands of people get to watch a free movie now, they will remember that and be more likely to pay in the future.

Word-of-mouth is more likely if more people have access. Most successful projects involve interacting, utilizing social media. Causing a sense of alienation at the onset will not bode well...

Moreover, the internet is very unforgiving. If it becomes apparent you want people to watch just to get your money back, you may encounter some bad press. There are many past examples of this.
Click to expand...

I may very well put it up for free eventually. But at this point I'm still trying to get people to buy/rent the movie. I have a 99-cent rental deal coming. My hope is to be able to repay my investors.

The purpose of the other thread was to find ways to fine-tune the marketing materials -- synopsis, trailer, Facebook page -- to do a better job of piquing the interest of people and getting them to take a chance on at least renting the movie online. That's why I made it available to watch for free for a limited time. It was a limited focus for a specific purpose.

Let me get this straight -- wanting people to rent or buy the movie "just to get [my] money back' is a BAD thing? Wow..... Wonder if Hollywood knows that. :-)

If people get upset because someone wants to get paid a fair price for something they build or create, then I don't know what to say. Sorry, but I don't make movies just to put them out for people to have for free. The people who invest want to at least make their money back, and would like to make a profit. All the people -- including me -- who worked hard on a deferred-pay basis would like to get paid for their work. I don't think there's anything unreasonable about wanting people to pay to watch a feature-length movie. Call me crazy. :-)
 
David W. Richardson said:
I may very well put it up for free eventually. But at this point I'm still trying to get people to buy/rent the movie. I have a 99-cent rental deal coming. My hope is to be able to repay my investors.

The purpose of the other thread was to find ways to fine-tune the marketing materials -- synopsis, trailer, Facebook page -- to do a better job of piquing the interest of people and getting them to take a chance on at least renting the movie online. That's why I made it available to watch for free for a limited time. It was a limited focus for a specific purpose.

Let me get this straight -- wanting people to rent or buy the movie "just to get [my] money back' is a BAD thing? Wow..... Wonder if Hollywood knows that. :-)

If people get upset because someone wants to get paid a fair price for something they build or create, then I don't know what to say. Sorry, but I don't make movies just to put them out for people to have for free. The people who invest want to at least make their money back, and would like to make a profit. All the people -- including me -- who worked hard on a deferred-pay basis would like to get paid for their work. I don't think there's anything unreasonable about wanting people to pay to watch a feature-length movie. Call me crazy. :-)
Click to expand...

You're crazy.

You said to call you crazy..

$1000 is barely an investment. Nobody invests in an independent production thinking they will re-coup their money and then some. And if that is their mindset then they just threw their money away. Indie films rarely make their money back. Films much better than yours tank all the time; films with name actors, good production value and a decent budget behind them.

If your sole purpose is to make money from indie films... make a horror movie or some kind of genre film, and crank out like 2-3 a year for as little money as possible. Or get a job working on a real project. As in one one you are not directing and don't have a financial stake in.

I applaud your effort but you are severely blind to the fact that your movie (irregardless if a few people enjoy it) will not make money. No amount of help from this forum will allow you achieve success in this regard, short of someone paying you a $1000 right now.

Harsh? yeah. But also realistic. On the flip side I'm betting if you release it for free it still won't garner the attention you seek. 5 years is a long time to still be pushing a film. It's old and people like new.

I think you've got a bit of a catch 22 here. Make next to nothing if you continue to sell it.. or fail to widen your audience due to the project being so old.

Prove me wrong if you must... but why is it so important to you to 'pay your investor back' ? Surely they understood what they were doing.. and if they didn't.. well they likely shouldn't have given you the money in the first place.

Work on your new project. Make the better version of this type of film and sell the **** out of it!

Or give me the finger and remain stubborn.

Some many options!
 
Loki said:
You're crazy.

You said to call you crazy..

$1000 is barely an investment. Nobody invests in an independent production thinking they will re-coup their money and then some. And if that is their mindset then they just threw their money away. Indie films rarely make their money back. Films much better than yours tank all the time; films with name actors, good production value and a decent budget behind them.

If your sole purpose is to make money from indie films... make a horror movie or some kind of genre film, and crank out like 2-3 a year for as little money as possible. Or get a job working on a real project. As in one one you are not directing and don't have a financial stake in.

I applaud your effort but you are severely blind to the fact that your movie (irregardless if a few people enjoy it) will not make money. No amount of help from this forum will allow you achieve success in this regard, short of someone paying you a $1000 right now.

Harsh? yeah. But also realistic. On the flip side I'm betting if you release it for free it still won't garner the attention you seek. 5 years is a long time to still be pushing a film. It's old and people like new.

I think you've got a bit of a catch 22 here. Make next to nothing if you continue to sell it.. or fail to widen your audience due to the project being so old.

Prove me wrong if you must... but why is it so important to you to 'pay your investor back' ? Surely they understood what they were doing.. and if they didn't.. well they likely shouldn't have given you the money in the first place.

Work on your new project. Make the better version of this type of film and sell the s*%t out of it!

Or give me the finger and remain stubborn.

Some many options!
Click to expand...

Is rudeness REALLY necessary?

Sorry, I just don't agree. But I don't disrespect you or your opinion. I don't understand why it's necessary to be condescending and insulting, as if there's only ONE way to succeed and anybody who thinks differently is wrong and pig-headed.

I'm done.
 
steps on how i decide to watch a low budget independent film that i've never heard of...
1. see poster. if it catches my eye, proceed to step 2.
2. read synopsis and/or watch trailer. if still interesting, proceed to step 3.
3. check out reviews. if it has favorable reviews, proceed to step 4.
4. watch it.

problems with tangled web
1. unappealing poster.
2. original synopsis wasn't interesting.
3. no reviews.

people are more likely to give reviews if they really like something or really hate something. if you're not getting anything, that most likely means it was okay, but i wouldn't recommend it to other people and it's not worth my time to write up a review.
 
Loki said:
.... but why is it so important to you to 'pay your investor back' ? !
Click to expand...

Really???? REALLY??? That's a serious question?

Okay.....it's important to me because if there's any way possible, they DESERVE to recover their investment. They believed in me, and they believed in my film -- enough to put their hard-earned money into it. It's incumbent upon me to do everything I can to try to get them their money back. If it doesn't happen, then okay -- that's the risk they assumed when they signed on. But I'll be damned if I'm going to just LET them lose their money without doing my very best to help them recover as much of it as I can.

The investor deserves my very BEST efforts to make the movie earn as much as it possibly can, so they can get paid. The actors and crew deserve that same effort so they can get paid. They are all trusting me to fight for success.

If I don't fight that fight with all the determination I can muster, then I'm just using them to further my own aspirations. I'm sorry, but I'm not that kind of filmmaker. And I hope you're not either.
 
ugafan said:
steps on how i decide to watch a low budget independent film that i've never heard of...
1. see poster. if it catches my eye, proceed to step 2.
2. read synopsis and/or watch trailer. if still interesting, proceed to step 3.
3. check out reviews. if it has favorable reviews, proceed to step 4.
4. watch it.

problems with tangled web
1. unappealing poster.
2. original synopsis wasn't interesting.
3. no reviews.

people are more likely to give reviews if they really like something or really hate something. if you're not getting anything, that most likely means it was okay, but i wouldn't recommend it to other people and it's not worth my time to write up a review.
Click to expand...

Totally agree!

And all of these things were discussed in the original thread. Steps are being taken to get a better poster. The synopsis has been improved, and is still a work in progress. And a number of people have submitted reviews on IMDB over a week ago, but they still are not showing up on the IMDB page for the movie -- I don't know why, and there doesn't seem to be a process in IMDB to find out or fix the problem. But I do recognize the importance of reviews and am working on getting those up there.
 
David W. Richardson said:
Is rudeness REALLY necessary?

Sorry, I just don't agree. But I don't disrespect you or your opinion. I don't understand why it's necessary to be condescending and insulting, as if there's only ONE way to succeed and anybody who thinks differently is wrong and pig-headed.

I'm done.
Click to expand...

I'm just not sugar coating how I feel about your project is all. I have no personal stake in it. I have no issues with you personally.

If being honest is being rude.. then yeah sure.. I'm being rude I guess, I'm just not sugar coating how I feel about your project. Which can be mutually exclusive to you as a person.

Good luck with your endeavours I'll bow out of this now.
 
I'll base my comments on your trailer.

Its not good.

The opening visuals, and the supposed "webcam screen" with "stealth mode" and bright red colors look so fake and does not look menacing and something I should fear.

If its a webcam then I should expect it give me a hint where this webcam is placed in relation to the room. But the angle and framing tells me its on a tripod and the lighting and framing looks like its a soap opera.

Angles are not exciting, and so is the dialog and acting. And your webcam closeup shots are too long, cutting back and forth, its suppose to be a technique that you use to tease the viewer, making him ask, what is this thing, but in first frame showing it, you already know what its suppose to be, -a webcam.

Don't take it badly, it all just looks amateurish and cheap. Something a film student would do.
Honestly, when I saw your post days ago, I have to struggle to watch the trailer. I just got myself to finish it tonight.

In short David. I'd be honest with you. Its not a film I would even want to watch even if its free based on my perception from your trailer.

I'm only saying these things because you want honest feedback. And that, I must commend you, that takes guts.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top